[les3547]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

I would like to suggest having a separate “third party” lens category for Leica lenses. Leica R lenses (and Leica M39 screw mount less ideally) are quite adaptable to Pentax either using a Leitax adapter (Leitax lists some 45 Leica R lenses and variations that can be adapted), and there are several less expensive Chinese adapters such as these.

Leica is the grandfather of 35mm photography, as discussed in this article, so it does seem Leica lenses deserve a bit better than being unceremoniously dumped into the “Miscellaneous” third party category. However, a separate listing needn’t be merely for nostalgia or veneration sake. Since Leica is the architect of some of the finest lenses ever made, its own review category might encourage more to try and review the lenses.

Edit: I'm referring to the Third Party Lens Reviews section of PF.

---

Last edited by les3547; 06-06-2019 at 11:57 AM.

[normhead]

I would like to suggest having a separate “third party” lens category for Leica lenses. Leica R lenses (and Leica M39 screw mount less ideally) are quite adaptable to Pentax either using a Leitax adapter (Leitax lists some 45 Leica R lenses and variations that can be adapted), and there are several less expensive Chinese adapters such as these.

Leica is the grandfather of 35mm photography, as discussed in this article, so it does seem Leica lenses deserve a bit better than being unceremoniously dumped into the “Miscellaneous” third party category. However, a separate listing needn’t be merely for nostalgia or veneration sake. Since Leica is the architect of some of the finest lenses ever made, its own review category might encourage more to try and review the lenses.

I don't care one way or the other. Every company has made great lenses. Pop photgraphy had an aritcal on the "greatest lenses ever made." Pentax had one, Canon and Nikon both had a couple, Sigma Tamron some of the third party companies had one. ZIess had a couple. I don't remember Leica even bing mentioned. But, if you have adapted Leica lenses and have them converted to use on your Pentax, why not post in the forum. After all there are lots of images taken with 3rd party lenses posted there. If as you say they are the best, they'll stand out and get noticed. What would be the point in burying them in a section that no one looks at?

Your argument seems to be Leica is special so they should get special treatment.
You lost me at "Leica is special." I've seen no evidence of that at least in terms of great images.
That's more of a thing for a generation before me, like my dad's generation.

I have some images taken by some rich clients of canoe guides using Lieca's back in the 30s, and my dad once owned a Leica.

I have no evidence of any Leica's in the park after 1935.

But the wealthy clients I've guided were using Canons and Nikons. I'm not sure we should be creating categories based on perceived historical importance. That's pretty irrelevant on what is mainly a photo sharing forum. Nor do i see any point in discussing Leica in it's current form. Do they even have a lens over 90mm?

There is a club for Sigma lenses, there are clubs for all kinds of lenses. Start a club for Leica lenses so we can see what all the fuss is about. Things can go from there.

[les3547]

I don't care one way or the other. Every company has made great lenses. Pop photgraphy had an aritcal on the "greatest lenses ever made." Pentax had one, Canon and Nikon both had a couple, Sigma Tamron some of the third party companies had one. ZIess had a couple. I don't remember Leica even bing mentioned. But, if you have adapted Leica lenses and have them converted to use on your Pentax, why not post in the forum. After all there are lots of images taken with 3rd party lenses posted there. If as you say they are the best, they'll stand out and get noticed. What would be the point in burying them in a section that no one looks at?

Your argument seems to be Leica is special so they should get special treatment.
You lost me at "Leica is special." I've seen no evidence of that at least in terms of great images.
That's more of a thing for a generation before me, like my dad's generation.

I have some images taken by some rich clients of canoe guides using Lieca's back in the 30s, and my dad once owned a Leica.

I have no evidence of any Leica's in the park after 1935.

But the wealthy clients I've guided were using Canons and Nikons. I'm not sure we should be creating categories based on perceived historical importance. That's pretty irrelevant on what is mainly a photo sharing forum. Nor do i see any point in discussing Leica in it's current form. Do they even have a lens over 90mm?

There is a club for Sigma lenses, there are clubs for all kinds of lenses. Start a club for Leica lenses so we can see what all the fuss is about. Things can go from there.

Very little you say seems relevant or makes sense including "I don't care one way or the other" since the rest of your post suggests you do care, and in a rather uninformed and prejudicial way.

If you try to buy Leica lenses you will see just how competitive the market is for some of them. Or, if you really wanted to, you could have searched online for the great number of enthusiasts, articles, Flickr contributors, etc. and then offered a more thoughtful and informed comment. It's hard not to judge yours as an opinionated rant because it sounds like you know absolutely nothing about Leica (which you basically admit/reveal over the course of your post). You aren't even Leica-informed about this site since there has been a Leica lens club going on 10 years now (where BTW I have posted, as well as in Reviews). And why the straw man? Didn't I suggest it's not just about historical importance when I said, "a separate listing needn’t be merely for nostalgia or veneration sake. Since Leica is the architect of some of the finest lenses ever made, its own review category might encourage more to try and review the lenses"? Neither did I say Leica lenses are "the best" as you falsely implied (I expressed that SOME are finest lenses ever made). While I'm complaining about your rather rude post, I must say that last I looked you aren't moderating here, so seems arrogant to say "Start a club for Leica lenses so we can see what all the fuss is about. Things can go from there."

As for you "not [knowing of] Leica's in the park after 1935" meaning anything whatsoever about Leica lenses (unless maybe you are the god of lenses), I suggest you study up on current Leica offerings before you say such things. Leica R models are discontinued, but they were made up to 2009. (FYI, a number of R lenses are over 90mm. However, of what importance are gaps in a lens line up in terms of trying out lenses that DO exist???). And Leica still makes Leica M, mirrorless SL, medium format, etc. Leica is alive and well, AND available for Pentax (which for me, after the K1 came out, majorly ramped up my interest in FF classic lenses). That you do not appreciate the Leica "look" so many others value is about you, not Leica. Just like that I do not appreciate Pentax lenses so much (and that's after trying every single Limited and most star lenses) . . . is about me, not Pentax lenses. Your tastes in lenses (or mine) are not the judge of greatness, nor are pop culture opinions, or what you last heard mentioned anywhere, or experience with wealthy clients (a weird thing to say anyway)

Other reasons why Leica deserves its own category? The love of Leica can border on obsession for those who appreciate the ability of some Leica lenses to highly resolve but gently so; to produce the Leica look or "glow" as described in this article from a favorite site, The Art Photo Academy. Lenses with personality or that lend themselves to artistic renderings appeal to some of us more than razor sharpness that seems to be the primary IQ judgement standard for nearly every freakin' modern lens review in the universe.

What do you think—that this site will be denigrated by separating Leica out from the "Miscellaneous" category? What makes doing that so "special," as you say, when even Quantaray and Russian/Zenitar have their own separate categories!

[normhead]

Very little you say seems relevant or makes sense including "I don't care one way or the other" since the rest of your post suggests you do care, and in a rather uninformed and prejudicial way.

If you try to buy Leica lenses you will see just how competitive the market is for some of them. Or, if you really wanted to, you could have searched online for the great number of enthusiasts, articles, Flickr contributors, etc. and then offered a more thoughtful and informed comment. It's hard not to judge yours as an opinionated rant because it sounds like you know absolutely nothing about Leica (which you basically admit/reveal over the course of your post). You aren't even Leica-informed about this site since there has been a Leica lens club going on 10 years now (where BTW I have posted, as well as in Reviews). And why the straw man? Didn't I suggest it's not just about historical importance when I said, "a separate listing needn’t be merely for nostalgia or veneration sake. Since Leica is the architect of some of the finest lenses ever made, its own review category might encourage more to try and review the lenses"? Neither did I say Leica lenses are "the best" as you falsely implied (I expressed that SOME are finest lenses ever made). While I'm complaining about your rather rude post, I must say that last I looked you aren't moderating here, so seems arrogant to say "Start a club for Leica lenses so we can see what all the fuss is about. Things can go from there."

As for you "not [knowing of] Leica's in the park after 1935" meaning anything whatsoever about Leica lenses (unless maybe you are the god of lenses), I suggest you study up on current Leica offerings before you say such things. Leica R models are discontinued, but they were made up to 2009. (FYI, a number of R lenses are over 90mm. However, of what importance are gaps in a lens line up in terms of trying out lenses that DO exist???). And Leica still makes Leica M, mirrorless SL, medium format, etc. Leica is alive and well, AND available for Pentax (which for me, after the K1 came out, majorly ramped up my interest in FF classic lenses). That you do not appreciate the Leica "look" so many others value is about you, not Leica. Just like that I do not appreciate Pentax lenses so much (and that's after trying every single Limited and most star lenses) . . . is about me, not Pentax lenses. Your tastes in lenses (or mine) are not the judge of greatness, nor are pop culture opinions, or what you last heard mentioned anywhere, or experience with wealthy clients (a weird thing to say anyway)

Other reasons why Leica deserves its own category? The love of Leica can border on obsession for those who appreciate the ability of some Leica lenses to highly resolve but gently so; to produce the Leica look or "glow" as described in this article from a favorite site, The Art Photo Academy. Lenses with personality or that lend themselves to artistic renderings appeal to some of us more than razor sharpness that seems to be the primary IQ judgement standard for nearly every freakin' modern lens review in the universe.

What do you think—that this site will be denigrated by separating Leica out from the "Miscellaneous" category? What makes doing that so "special," as you say, when even Quantaray and Russian/Zenitar have their own separate categories!

Leica Lens Club - PentaxForums.com

What are you going on about?

[c.a.m]

What are you going on about?

The Leica Lens Club does a fine job at showing the superb characteristics of numerous Leica lenses.

Separately, I think the OP is referring to the "Third-Party Lens Reviews" in the Lens Database section: Pentax Lenses by Sigma, Tamron, Zeiss, and more - Reviews and Specification Database - Pentax Lens Review Database

There are unique review sections for sixteen brands of lenses, but Leica is relegated to the "Miscellaneous" section, and there are six Leica lenses currently listed. Certainly, a reader could 'search' for Leica, but I think there is a case for establishing a separate review sub-section for this venerable brand.

- Craig

[normhead]

The Leica Lens Club does a fine job at showing the superb characteristics of numerous Leica lenses.

Separately, I think the OP is referring to the "Third-Party Lens Reviews" in the Lens Database section: Pentax Lenses by Sigma, Tamron, Zeiss, and more - Reviews and Specification Database - Pentax Lens Review Database

There are unique review sections for sixteen brands of lenses, but Leica is relegated to the "Miscellaneous" section, and there are six Leica lenses currently listed. Certainly, a reader could 'search' for Leica, but I think there is a case for establishing a separate review sub-section for this venerable brand.

- Craig

As I said, I really don't care.

Leica (Leitz) glass club - PentaxForums.com

Just saying, if you want to discuss Lieca there are people here.

[les3547]

Separately, I think the OP is referring to the "Third-Party Lens Reviews" in the Lens Database section: Pentax Lenses by Sigma, Tamron, Zeiss, and more - Reviews and Specification Database - Pentax Lens Review Database . . .There are unique review sections for sixteen brands of lenses, but Leica is relegated to the "Miscellaneous" section . . .
- Craig

That's it.

Just saying, if you want to discuss Lieca there are people here.

Well, the thread is about the location of Leica reviews and PF review categories. Looking at the original post—I could've been more clear on that point.

[boriscleto]

There is already a section for Leica lenses...

Miscellaneous Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

[les3547]

There is already a section for Leica lenses...

Miscellaneous Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

Lol. I'm trying to point out that Leica lens reviews are dumped in "Miscellaneous" instead of having their own "Leica" category (like, say, Zeiss or Voigtlander), and that given the quality and history of Leica it seems more fitting to assign them a distinct named category.

[boriscleto]

Lol. I'm trying to point out that Leica lens reviews are dumped in "Miscellaneous" instead of having their own "Leica" category (like, say, Zeiss or Voigtlander), and that given the quality and history of Leica it seems more fitting to assign them a distinct named category.

Voigtlander and Zeiss made native K-mount and M-42 lenses. Leica did not.

[Adam]

Voigtlander and Zeiss made native K-mount and M-42 lenses. Leica did not.

Indeed- with the exception of Adaptall lenses (which had official K mount adapters), all of the dedicated categories in the review section contain lenses specifically for Pentax.

I therefore don't think that a dedicated Leica category would serve much of a purpose in the current way the database is structured. That's not to say, though, that Leica lenses and other prominent lenses currently in the misc category can't be showcased in some other way in the future.

[stevebrot]

ol. I'm trying to point out that Leica lens reviews are dumped in "Miscellaneous" instead of having their own "Leica" category (like, say, Zeiss or Voigtlander)

Being dumped may have something to do with both Zeiss and Voigtlander having made lenses in both M42 and K-mount. Leitax conversions are very interesting and something of a novelty, but if Leitz product is given its own review section, the same might be done for converted Nikon and Olympus.


Steve

[boriscleto]

Being dumped may have something to do with both Zeiss and Voigtlander having made lenses in both M42 and K-mount. Leitax conversions are very interesting and something of a novelty, but if Leitz product is given its own review section, the same might be done for converted Nikon and Olympus.


Steve

The Leitax F-mount conversion was originally for Zeiss lenses. It just happened to be compatible with some Nikkors ...

[stevebrot]

It just happened to be compatible with some Nikkors ...

Cool...I guess that might be why I said "converted Nikon".


Steve